Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add more pdf-to-image engines? #27

Open
vinayak-mehta opened this issue Jul 6, 2019 · 5 comments
Open

Add more pdf-to-image engines? #27

vinayak-mehta opened this issue Jul 6, 2019 · 5 comments

Comments

@vinayak-mehta
Copy link
Member

Ghostscript does the job of doing this currently but is a pain to install and debug and does not have a friendly license. Before we can do #13, does it make sense to use python-pdfbox. Then again, it downloads the pdfbox jar file and would need java to be installed on user systems.

atlanhq/camelot#346

@vinayak-mehta
Copy link
Member Author

@dimitern What do you think?

@KOLANICH
Copy link
Contributor

KOLANICH commented Jul 29, 2019

Also GhostScript has a bad fame of being vulnerable. Probably we want something written in a memory-safe language like rust or java. So +1 for pdfbox. But for this being efficient we need lebedov/python-pdfbox#10 first. Also there is https://github.com/katjas/PDFrenderer

@woshizouguo
Copy link

Is there any update on removing GhostScript?

@mara004
Copy link
Contributor

mara004 commented Jun 22, 2023

Just FYI, pypdfium2 (ctypes binding to google's pdfium) is liberal-licensed, too.1

pdfium is written in C/C++, though, so not an inherently memory safe language, as opposed to Java.
However, it's well-tested/analyzed and relied on by popular projects such as chromium and libreoffice, and as a tradeoff it doesn't require an additional runtime env.

Footnotes

  1. disclaimer: I'm the author

@mara004
Copy link
Contributor

mara004 commented Jun 23, 2023

PR submitted: #384

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants